Stop the torture of Bradley Manning

So you don't trust the government not to do something stupid...except on this?

It has nothing to do with trust. It has to do with the reality of how these things work.

But, hey who am I to argue with a genius like you right? You are after all certified by the IRS to prepare taxes.

That's a good line, I'm gonna use that one in the future. Because it means absolutely jack shit, but it sure sounds important.

I know everything that anyone else says is just jack shit, Nick. You are after all the IRS Certified tax preparer.

"The goddamn Germans got nuttin' to do with it!"

Don't be so hateful, Nick.

Leave the ball sucker alone. He's got to prove his manliness some how or other.

As stated earlier, this Heinlein-esque conceit is most repugnant. You are bragging, but it's nothing to be proud of, and it doesn't matter a fuck. Incredulity is not an argument.

It is your evidence that is anecdotal. Mine is the records that you guys kept yourselves.

Wow, Rick...those are some impressive words! "Heinlein-esque" is the one I must say I've never encountered. Does anyone other than yourself know what that means?

And I'm not bragging - I'm just telling you how things are. You have no idea how a military checkpoint even operates, but you trust the reports about all the fatalities. Yet when anyone doubts The Lancet (and other sources) concerning the grossly overinflated Iraqi civilian deaths, you say we are in denial. So which is it, Rick? Do you cherry-pick which data to believe in?

I don't need to know how a military checkpoint operates to accept that when the US military themselves report in their own internal documents that they killed 834 civilians at them, they're unlikely to be lying.
That's not mutually exclusive with the Lancet study, or any other study, so there is no cherry-picking being done and no "which is it?" arises.

"Heinlein-esque" refers to the tendency to hold military service up as an ideal, and to dismiss the views of those who haven't participated in such service, reflecting the quasi-fascist views of the author.

Fuck, that's just stupid. Heinlein wrote one book that infuriated liberals called Starship Troopers where he suggested a model. He also wrote literally hundreds of others, including one of the definitive counter culture books that the left lapped up called Stranger in a Strange Land.

And of course he didn't delineate just military service in that one book, but federal service to the community in some shape or form. It wasn't even mandatory, like a real life example of mandatory armed service such as Switzerland, which also is one of the oldest democracies in the world. Those fascists! LOL.

In his early years Heinlein was described by Asimov as 'a flaming liberal', worked for and ran for office as a democrat, and worked in socialist movements such as Upton Sinclair's Ending Poverty in America. Later he turned to the right and worked for Goldwater.

Oh, and he invented the water bed.

Obviously, you don't grok.

Rick you're like a 3 year old playing adult. You have no clue what you're talking about, have no concept of how the world operates and no clue at all about anything military. The rest of us look at you and think how [-]cute[/-] totally fucking stupid the 3 year old in an adults body is.

Whether I'm wrong about Heinleins views or not matters not to the main argument here.

(I've only read Starship Troopers.)

Yet you have the gall to use a phrase like 'Heinlein-esque'. <smirk>

DickRetard just goes to show that you don't have to know anything to have an opinion.

He's a "useful idiot".

So Rick - I'm not going to attempt to access the reports because I value my job. But can you cut + paste an actual sample of the report that lists over 800 killed at checkpoints? In other words, actual locations, times, etc? Perhaps mulitiple sources, so I can reference validity?

If everyone on this board started giving only educated opinions this board would cease to be.

How Orwellian.

This page summarises the data and provides links for the whole lot to be downloaded. What we're talking about here are mainly the "escalation of force" incidents.

Here you can see the table containing the list of incidents. Most involve murders and IEDs, so you'll need to filter it.

Typical entries as follows:

Report key: 14974
Date and time: 13/03/2004 00:03
Type: Friendly action
Category: Escalation of Force
Title: 4/3 ACR ENGAGED CIVILIAN VEHICLE IVO HIT: 1 EKIA
Region: MNF-W
Attack on: FRIEND

9B6BBBDA-E327-4CBE-AE7E-5C79D0C83FC0
02/04/2004 01:45
Friendly Action
Escalation of Force
ESCALATION OF FORCE BY CF IVO BALAD: 1 CIV KILLED, 0 CF INJ/DAMAGE
MND-N
FRIEND

F18B387B-2F4F-4838-BBDA-6538472BFEC9
21/04/2004 03:30
Friendly Action
Escalation of Force
An Iraqi drove a veh into a NL BG and ICDC VCP along Route Jackson IVO of the Spanish and NL border, and was engaged by SAF. The driver was wounded and subsequently died after recieving medical treatment.
MND-C
FRIEND

957DAC17-43AA-4D25-AB77-1C31DFB39EDF
14/06/2005 15:30
Friendly Action
Escalation of Force
ESCALATION OF FORCE BY 1-5 IVO HURRICANE POINT: 7 CIV KILLED, 0 CIV INJURED, 0 CF
MNF-W
FRIEND

Jesus Christ.....not wanting to access a controversial site at work (and I'm a government contractor with a Sceret Security Clearance) is "Orwellian?" :i: BTW the new NSA (National Security Agency) just set up shop down the street.

It's called supporting a family....fancy that. Not wanting to lose my high-paying job over a website that we have been warned not to explore.

So I gues Rick has me here.....he has the data and I can't refute it.
However....."escalation of force" doesn't tell the whole story. Generally, we (military) give civilians every chance we can to behave themselves/cooperate with the procedures. With a war going on for several years, one would think Iraqi civilians would be smart enough to do what the fuck they are told when the time comes.

I had the chance to kill some civilians and while it would have been tragic, it was also understandable. But you really, really would have had to "be there" to really comprehend the situation.

If I had killed them, the report might very well read "killed a friendly" while omitting the crucial fact that the civilians were insanely irresponsible. But reports are brief...they don't include lengthy eyewitness statements.

Thus......I stand by my intital claim. If any civilians were killed (outside the legal procedures the military are bound to) there would be 800 Courts Martial. Can anyone produce the reports covering all these trials? Surely there must be a record of these legal procedings.

So please...dig, dig for these facts.

I didn't claim that these civilians were killed outside of the procedures that the US military applies to itself. That would defeat my argument about the US military itself being the guilty party, involved in covering these incidents up.
But kudos for honesty.

Fortunately we will get to see continued entertainment from you and the ignorance and stupidity you will continue to demonstrate on most every topic.

Next thing you know, Rick will posting goatse pics.

I hope not. I'm really not interested in seeing his family album.:keg:

I know it's the Red Room, but he didn't have to say I was Heinekenesque!

In Orwells case, I've read almost every word that he wrote.

Controversial sites like the NY Times or The Guardian...

Army brings 22 new charges against Bradley Manning, including "aiding the enemy." I wonder if the irony of this "aiding the enemy" charge is lost on the government or not.

How exactly is it ironic to charge Manning with aiding the enemy?

[Inigo Montoya] I do not think that word means what you think it means. [/Inigo Montoya]

It is notable that "the enemy" specified has not been named.